IE9 Preview 6 available, now with secret Beta UI

Microsoft released IE9 Preview 6. We show you how to give it a UI.

Microsoft demoed the latest developer preview of IE9 during the PDC 2010 keynote. Much like earlier previews, this one doesn't have much in the way of a UI. It's effectively a toolbar and the new rendering engine. The engine is wicked fast, however, and Microsoft has a number of demos that really put it through its paces.

The lack of UI is kind of a bore, so we asked how to make it more useful (and Microsoft told us). If you'd like to make it look and act like the beta (including all the chrome and new UI features), we have instructions. But first... a video!

IE9 Preview 6

How to enable a real UI

This IE9 process will now have all the platform capabilities of Internet Explorer Platform Preview 6 with the user experience features of IE9 Beta. It’s important to note: If a user takes these steps, the IE9 Beta browser will not be replaced by a newer version of IE9. However, in order for the newly created IE process to run with the enhanced platform capabilities provided in Platform Preview 6, all prior IE windows must be closed before running the new IE process from the IE9_PP6 folder.

Install IE9 Beta on your machine. You can download IE9 Beta from www.beautyoftheweb.com

Copy the iexplore.exe file from the C:/Program Files/Internet Explorer directory (or C:/Program Files (x86)/Internet Explorer if you are on a 64 bit machine) to the IE9_PP6 folder

Create a folder inside IE9_PP6 called iexplore.exe.local (Note: It is imperative that you name this folder exactly as specified)

Navigate to the Internet Explorer Platform Preview directory within Program files (commonly on 32 bit machines this will be at C:/Program Files/Internet Explorer Platform Preview and on 64 bit machines this will be at C:/Program Files (x86)/Internet Explorer Platform Preview)

Copy the contents of the iepreview.exe.local folder within the Internet Explorer Platform Preview directory to the iexplore.exe.local folder within IE9_PP6

Close all instances of IE running on your machine and run iexplore.exe from IE9_PP6

I have no particular affection for IE, but it's good to see that the browser that 60-70% of the world uses is once again becoming a contender on its own merit. The next few years should be good for web users and web developers alike.

He probably did not even read the article. He probably skimmed and saw the words 'Microsoft' and 'faster' and that is all that was needed to send him into a blind rage.

We really need to drop the everything MS = bad stigma. They have made great strides with IE9 and are conforming to far more web standards than ever before. Don't get mad just because they have done something right with IE for once.. seems kind of childish..

While it's good that IE9 have improved a lot - competition's a wonderful thing. I won't be using it for the simple reason that I don't use Windows. I have just one question about those tests. I'm aware that Chrome doesn't yet have hardware accerelation for their browser but it's coming. However Firefox does have it in their current beta browser does it not? If I remember rightly, you had to enable it in the configuration - but looking at the video it might appear that they did not do this (although I would say that's still fair if it's off by default and if they're using default settings....)

He probably did not even read the article. He probably skimmed and saw the words 'Microsoft' and 'faster' and that is all that was needed to send him into a blind rage.

We really need to drop the everything MS = bad stigma. They have made great strides with IE9 and are conforming to far more web standards than ever before. Don't get mad just because they have done something right with IE for once.. seems kind of childish..

To be fair to the sceptics, MS has made huge improvements in their products, but have a long history of seriously skewing their studies.

MS said IE8 waster "faster" than the competition too (despite everyone else saying it was slower by magnitudes of 3 or more), so you'll have to forgive me if I don't believe this one at face value.

While it's good that IE9 have improved a lot - competition's a wonderful thing. I won't be using it for the simple reason that I don't use Windows. I have just one question about those tests. I'm aware that Chrome doesn't yet have hardware accerelation for their browser but it's coming. However Firefox does have it in their current beta browser does it not? If I remember rightly, you had to enable it in the configuration - but looking at the video it might appear that they did not do this (although I would say that's still fair if it's off by default and if they're using default settings....)

Chromium 7/8 has it too.. Although I think IE9 does have the edge when it comes to this front though, as their implementation seems a bit more flexible and versatile.(in which it leverages direct2d and 3d).

They are at a disadvantage because only Windows Vista+ machines will be able to take advantage of it, but because they have forgone legacy users this time around, the performance delta between MS's implementation and Chrome/FF's implementation may be well worth it..

Due to their crossplatform nature, Chrome will be using a GL implementation (not sure what FF is doing, but they expect to have it available for legacy users, so I'm guessing they either are not using direct2d, or do something different in Windows 7). MS also has an advantage here as neither company has much experience on the 3d front, while MS has plenty of experience dealing with the innards of Direct3d and more recently 2d.

They are at a disadvantage because only Windows Vista+ machines will be able to take advantage of it, but because they have forgone legacy users this time around, the performance delta between MS's implementation and Chrome/FF's implementation may be well worth it..

Due to their crossplatform nature, Chrome will be using a GL implementation (not sure what FF is doing, but they expect to have it available for legacy users, so I'm guessing they either are not using direct2d, or do something different in Windows 7). MS also has an advantage here as neither company has much experience on the 3d front, while MS has plenty of experience dealing with the innards of Direct3d and more recently 2d.

Or.. MS is ahead of both browsers in terms of hardware acceleration.. Which if you have been following the news, seems to be the case.

I don't use IE myself, and probably never will, but so far it looks quite intriguing.

Oh, it is intriguing. And sure, they may be ahead, but the point is the helicopter demo isn't exactly the most convincing tech demo. It should be doable without a GPU. Its a ported flash game. Microsoft does have more impressive tech demos to offer.

runs faster than any other broswqer installed my little super computer here, and i havent seen any visual bugs, so thats all i care about...

I will go back to caring about standard compliance once someone cares enought to hire me again - until then, i dont have to worry about condition ie statement... something I actually like becasue this whole idea that IE did it different and everyone else was the saem was crap and a lie. Maybe times have changes dince I was laid off, but there were plenty of time I wished either FF or Safari has condition statements, because whiole IE need it MORE, its not like havng access to similar hacks for the other browsers wasnt warranted..;.

This assume were ingoring IE6, but in pretty much ever job I have had over the past couple years, we were cleared to ignore it... (lucky, i know)

Or.. MS is ahead of both browsers in terms of hardware acceleration.. Which if you have been following the news, seems to be the case.

I don't use IE myself, and probably never will, but so far it looks quite intriguing.

Oh, it is intriguing. And sure, they may be ahead, but the point is the helicopter demo isn't exactly the most convincing tech demo. It should be doable without a GPU. Its a ported flash game. Microsoft does have more impressive tech demos to offer.

are we all really going to get all fussy over just one demo? talk about nitpick...

Personally, browser speed matters but beyond a certain point I don't really think its the deciding factor.Nowadays, my browsing speed is limited by my network connection and not my browser, and I have a pretty fast connection.My browser choice now boils down to UI and extendability, and Chrome does both very well.

Is there any compelling reason to use IE9 besides the touted hardware acceleration (which I find its use limited for the next few years)?From here, it looks like IE is still playing catch-up.

Yeah, it runs faster. It's also been optimized to run on IE. Everyone claiming to have a serious opinion on these comparisons should take MS speed tests with a half pound of salt, especially considering past experience.

I'll compare "FPS" for HTML5 games across different browsers some time in the distant future when it's a) relevant b) done by a neutral party c) run in production or RC versions of each browser.

I appreciate the fact that Microsoft has a real team developing IE again, but Mozilla/Google deserve all the credit for forcing MS to do so and moving forward on implementing "new" technologies such as HTML5, SVG rendering and the like.

Yeah, it runs faster. It's also been optimized to run on IE. Everyone claiming to have a serious opinion on these comparisons should take MS speed tests with a half pound of salt, especially considering past experience.

I'll compare "FPS" for HTML5 games across different browsers some time in the distant future when it's a) relevant b) done by a neutral party c) run in production or RC versions of each browser.

I appreciate the fact that Microsoft has a real team developing IE again, but Mozilla/Google deserve all the credit for forcing MS to do so and moving forward on implementing "new" technologies such as HTML5, SVG rendering and the like.

I believe MS has submitted these tests to the W3C so any developer can use them. So I don't find your criticism particularly valid on this point.

I'm looking forward to having IE9 as the baseline, because it's an order of magnitude better performance-wise than the current baseline (IE7 / IE8, luckily our customers have moved off of IE6). Whenever you're talking about orders of magnitude, that means entire new classes of applications become possible.

He probably did not even read the article. He probably skimmed and saw the words 'Microsoft' and 'faster' and that is all that was needed to send him into a blind rage.

We really need to drop the everything MS = bad stigma. They have made great strides with IE9 and are conforming to far more web standards than ever before. Don't get mad just because they have done something right with IE for once.. seems kind of childish..

Childish is making the above kind of assumptions.

I read the article, played the demo, then went to the website to see if I could get it to run on existing Firefox 3.6, not the beta, and got the H.264 codec compatibility issue since plain 3.6 doesn't support H264. Since I have a real job, I had to drop it and get back to work, part of which is trying to get our website compatible with all browsers. Easy for do for Firefox, Safari and Chrome, just use the standards. Harder for IE. I would welcome a standards compliant browser from Microsoft, but I'm not holding my breath...

Do you really need hardware acceleration for something as visually simple as the second demo (with the helicopter)?

Did not seem much more complex that some old C64 games to me, and I don't think there was a dedicated graphics card to offload the processor then.

Actually the C64 did have a dedicated graphics chip, the VIC-II. It was pretty awesome for its day, especially the hardware based sprites combined with the interrupt handling (you could fake having a lot more than the 8 hardware sprites). It also had hardware based smooth scrolling of the non sprite image which was put to good use in a number of games.

I believe MS has submitted these tests to the W3C so any developer can use them. So I don't find your criticism particularly valid on this point.

Exactly, they are suppose to conform to standards (most of which is HTML5).

The tests submitted to the W3C are CSS and HTML5 conformance tests, not demos of helicopters and inflatable boats

Quote:

Neither the Chrome team nor the Firefox team have complained about them so far, which is a good indication in the first place.

The demos are good (and bragging rights from them are great for inspiring competition), but there have been some complaints about some disinformation about what exactly is "full" acceleration (which is as much of a marketing push as "same markup," which is not exactly a new concept...):http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/arch ... are_a.html(I posted that above as well, sorry)

The truth is, whatever the technical arguments are doesn't matter. What matters is which appears to be faster to the user. If the other browser developers aren't happy by the tests then they should either provide tests that prove their counter-point or improve their browsers.

Screaming between ivory towers is not going to help the people on the ground.

I should stress there wasn't enough ">" to complete the message, so multiply it by infinity.

IE doesn't mean squat unless I can rid the following:If IE then'Do this because it's so goddamn picky, it needs its own programElse'Do what every other browser on the planet can doEnd If

I point out the irony that (based on other sources) IE is finally more compliant but now the issue is the damn browser kits needed to do specialized features.

Today's programmers and developers need to re-educate themselves on the KISS method.

I'm probably the last web developer looking forward to HTML5.

It's time to retire, I suppose, and let the kids take over.

Depending on what you're doing, you don't have to do that. I'm not a full time web developer but I've been doing my fair share, and in my experience, most of the cases that you described above applied only when I was trying to code in compatibility for IE8 Compatibility Mode, IE7 and before. There are lingering whitespace issues in IE8 but adjusting the page by a couple pixels for all browsers was a visually insignificant change that allowed me to avoid having to code in something to detect your browser version.

The fact is that we're rapidly approaching the time when you don't have to worry about coding your site differently for IE than for other browsers.

Hmm... the interface hack doesn't seem to be working for me. Does Aero need to be turned on?

Probably, doesn't turning off Aero disable Direct2D? I know many people turn it off because they think their desktop will be faster, but I'd wager that you get better performance from offloading the graphics processing to a video card instead of having the cpu render everything.

Hmm... the interface hack doesn't seem to be working for me. Does Aero need to be turned on?

Interface hack works fine for me with Aero off on Windows 7. If you're using a Windows x64 release ensure you are using the iexplore from your 32 bit installation ("Program Files (x86)") and not your 64 bit installation.

BeowulfSchaeffer wrote:

Sooooo, you post a Microsoft created test comparing beta browsers and IE9 wins. What a surprise...

Normally I'd agree that a first party technical demonstration would mean nothing but IE9 seems to be doing great rendering for me so far (beating or tying with Chrome a good amount of the time for the Chrome Experiments that render properly in IE9).